Jack August:
So KAET……will be……editing a lot of this. I'm either going to be edited out of the television series, which is probably what's going to happen. …Which is fine, and…, or I'm going to have to shoot seven introductions over again and have 5 or 6 different shirts and ties and appear as though it's……you all are here, but we'll…we'll figure it out later. …And I…I wanted to……kind of make this less formal today since I…I know Judge Rosenblat we……I think what we ss...we -- we maintain residences in Prescott and Phoenix and I think that's where the similarities end. …He's a well respected member of the Prescott community when he's there and you know people just kind of point at me when I drive in on Fridays or Saturdays. There he is. He's back and……I hope he's gone by Monday……

[laughter]

Jack August:
…Just a little bit about him and I'm just going to lift from our……brochure here, …Judge Rosenblat, upon the recommendation of Senator Goldwater in 1984, …was confirmed by U.S. Senate as a United States District Judge. …I think it's really fun and interesting hat he was born and raised in Prescott, …and one night at the El Gato Azul restaurant we went through his biography and it was long and colorful and………and part of it was that he attended Seattle University, the University of Washington……the University of Arizona. I think he had some pit stops……elsewhere……had a long life's experiences……in his……late teens and early twenties. …His education was, in fact, though, interrupted by service in the U.S. Army and a brief period of corporate employment. …He graduated from the U of A College of Law in 1963 and that seems to be the year a lot of some of our well known……people at least I've come in contact with in the context of this work. I've……have been at U of A Law School about that time. …He served as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Arizona from 1963 to '66. And was the administrative assistant to U.S. Congressman Sam Steiger, from 1967-1971. And just as an aside, I'm about to……in a couple months, give a paper……at the……Annual Arizona History Convention on the Conlin/Steiger primary of 1976 and I had to do some research into……Sam's……run for the U.S. Senate in that primary and I had to go into the records of Yavapai County of the Burro assassinations, ……

[laughter]

Jack August:
…that happened up in…in Pauldin, in Chino Valley , at the Wishing Well Bar. And Stan Turner's…, but I ended up learning top much about the…when the burros were running that way or coming at, you know…and……, but that will be left for the Tucson talk. …In any case, after working with Congressman Steiger, he returned to Prescott to engage in private practice. …He was then appointed to the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for Yavapai County by Governor Jack Williams, and served as presiding judge there from 1973-'84, an eleven year period. He assed senior status as a U.S. District Judge in 2003. …And he does, as I...as I said live in Prescott, and he main.... and he maintains his chambers in Phoenix and carries a substantial case load in both Phoenix and Prescott . And so without further ado and with really the most interesting title of the series, and he'll explain it, …Judge Paul Rosenblat.

[applause]

Judge Paul G. Rosenblatt:
Let's keep our fingers crossed. I'm sure I heard the weatherman say that there was a 40% chance of rain today and it's sunny outside.

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
So here we are a...about to rear an entire generation of kids who think the rain comes from sprinklers.

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
Maybe, just maybe, it will rain again.

Well thank you Jack, and good morning ladies and gentlemen. First, I would like to thank the board and its president, my old friend and colleague, Judge Kim Rose, for the opportunity to speak to you today, and to the many old and dear friends as well as all who've come here today, thank you, thank you.

It's an honor to speak to you as part of the Goldwater Lecture Series. It is of particular personal importance and pleasure because, but for the confidence the Senator had in me, it is unlikely that I would be standing here. It was he who recommended me to President Reagan for appointment to my fabulous job. When Jack invited me to speak this morning, he suggested that you might be interested in some of the cases……that I've had over the course of my 34 year judicial career and my reflections on that career. Well that gets a bit complicated, because every case has its own personality, its own challenges, and thus is uniquely interesting. And this is true whether you're talking about a barking dog case or a boundary dispute between neighbors, a complicated patent law or trade mark case, a mass tort case, a critical jurisdictional issue or a critical constitutional issue. Each is demanding because of the great importance to the litigants. Decisions can impact the lives and fortunes of two individuals or 200 individuals or two hundred million. We are called upon to handle the nation's most important matters of law. And a judge can never lose site of that responsibility when he or she puts on the robe, steps into the courtroom and onto the bench. Each and every case demands the judge's full attention.

Now having said that, I believe that there are a few cases that warrant some comment and which you may find informative. It has been my luck to have drawn some of the most highly publicized and complicated cases in both state and federal court. Perhaps you will recognize some of them. Before we do that, however, I thought you might be interested in a brief review of the judicial history of the territory and State of Arizona since that is the topic of this lecture series, and thus you will see part of the relevance of the title, “1863 to 2006, All but a Hundred.”

In 1863, Congress passed and President Abraham Lincoln signed the bill creating the Arizona territory. There had been several previous attempts to create a territory separated from New Mexico , they had all failed. Finally, however, the promise of gold and silver with their impact on the Civil War, led to the passage of the bill. Once created, the territorial party formed and came west, entering Arizona late in December of 1863 to officially establish the government. Now, it was an absolute necessity for them to be within the boundary of the territory because otherwise they couldn't be assured of their pay. And you know those of us in government need our paychecks on time.

[laughter]

[laughter]

Oh my! A trial judge's delight!

[laughter]

The obvious result was that almost all trial court decisions were affirmed.

[laughter]

…Were that true today, my appellate record would be much, much better.

[laughter]

Well, as you can imagine this arrangement did not sit well with the growing legal community and certainly not with the citizenry. An unsuccessful effort to get a fourth judge was followed by a legislative enactment that disqualified the trial judge from reviewing his own case. Thus, a Supreme Court decision only required the concurrence of two justices. But this posed problems as well. For example, what if the two could not agree? Still, there were other problems of a different nature. For one thing, the judges were appointed by the President, so at least early on, they were not from the territory, had never been to the territory, didn't know anything about the territory and most didn't stay long. The population was growing and shifting. Travel was exceedingly difficult. For example, from Tucson to Prescott, most would go north to the Pima villages on the Gila River and down the Gila River to the Colorado River, and then by boat up to La Paz or Hardyville and then, cross country to Prescott. Now this was obviously circuitous, but it was the safest route to take. And travel was by horse, mule, wagon, coach, or more commonly by shank's mare, that is, by foot. They walked. No matter what the means of travel, the Apache threat was very real and troublesome. The judicial districts also served as political subdivisions from which were elected the members of the territorial legislature. After the first elections were held on July 18, 1864, the legislature met in Prescott in September and divided the territory into four counties with boundaries distinct from the three judicial districts. They were Yavapai, Pima, Ya and Mohave. Soon new counties were created from the original four, most of which were from the mother county, Yavapai, until 14 existed at the time of statehood in 1912.

The law required the judge to sit in each county within his district. In addition, each judge was required to devote the first 6 days of each term to the trials of causes arising under the United States Constitution and federal laws. But the people wanted their own judges. From 1881 to statehood, efforts to create county courts whose judges were elected, took various forms with a great deal of controversy and little success. The legislature experimented with the creation of a few county courts, however, they pu...proved unsuccessful, because some counties had no work. And they didn't want to pay the judge for doing nothing.

[laughter]

And the boundaries of the judicial districts and the counties kept changing. Jurisdictional issues were a...arising of a various nature and financing became a problem. Eventually the county courts were eliminated as politically unsatisfactory, leaving the old system with all of its deficiencies. Confusing enough? Certainly. The solution came with statehood. The Arizona Constitution provided for a Superior Court which was a court of general jurisdiction in each county, the nber to be determined by population. And ari...a Supreme Court to consider appeals. In later years, an intermediate Court of Appeals was created and, of course, the United States District Court remained to address all United States Constitutional questions and laws. We now have perhaps 180 Superior Court judges, 22 Court of Appeals judges and 5 Arizona Supreme Court justices. There are 13 United States District judges, plus some seniors, 3 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges and one senior. In addition,there are commissioners, justice of the peace, municipal judges, tribal judges, administrative law judges, pro tem judges, United States magistrate judges and bankruptcy judges. I have no idea as to how many. But a huge, huge nber compared to those original three. As you know, the federal and state courts co-exist side by side, as a matter of federalism.

Well now, back to my marching orders. After 11 or 12 years in college in search of a career, I finally was graduated from the…

[laughter]

… University of Arizona College of Law in 1963 and there you have the other part of my chosen title. After a stint as an assistant Arizona Attorney General, where I first met Justice O'Connor incidentally, but that's another story. Sam Steiger, who in 1966 had just been elected to Congress, asked me to accompany him to Washington to be his administrative assistant. Shannon and I had just married. It sounded like a great adventure, so we accepted. Sam was a unique person to work for.

[laughter]

On the one hand, he left the running of his Washington office pretty much up to me, while he devoted his time to legislative, political and personal issues. On the other hand, he was absolutely unpredictable, which meant I never knew what kind of a storm might await me when I arrived at Capital Hill. Still it was a superb experience, giving me an opportunity to be a small part of the legislative process, the most important being the fight for the Central Arizona Project. And to work with Senators Carl Hayden and Paul Fannin. Then Barry, when he came back. Are you out there Judy? As well as with Congressman John Rhodes and Mo Udall. Arizona packed a lot of wallop for a small delegation. I got invited to the White House on occasion and to work with the staffs of Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon as well as with all of the departments, commissions and agencies. It was heady stuff. But after 4 and ½ years as I was fearing the onset of Potomac Fever, which incidentally is a very real disease...

[laughter]

Shannon and our two Washington born daughters returned to Prescott where I was born to start a law practice. And it went quite well. In those days, new lawyers were appointed by the judge whether you liked it or not, and with little compensation to represent indigent defendants in criminal cases. I did that with some fair success. Judge Jack Ogg appointed me to represent, among others, a man charged with the incest rape of a minor. Then a man charged with child molestation and then two men charged with cattle rustling.

[laughter]

The cases all received publicity. And I bped into Sam one day and he said, “Listen pal, you may b...get by in this town representing child molesters and other incestuous types, but if you get these cattle rustlers off you'd better find another place to live.”

[laughter]

And I can still see that courtroom full of ranchers.

[laughter]

My most notable civil case in private practice was an action involving the Yavapai Citizens Association, Queen Creek Lammen Cattle Company and the Yavapai County Board of Supervisors. The issue was whether the YCA could seek a referend to the voters for approval or rejection of a county zoning ordinance change. Queen Creek, the developer, filed suit to enjoin the effort. And YCA, through its officers, Charley Orme and Jerry Everall hired me to represent them. We prevailed in the trial court. It was a landmark case at the time when land development was becoming and issue of great public concern, as a result of the fraudulent developers such as Ned Warren, a name familiar to many of you. The case was appealed by Queen Creek to the Arizona Supreme Court. A short time before the Supreme Court argent, I blew out my knee playing softball with my daughter Delia. And with a cast on my leg and after another fall that resulted in a couple of broken ribs, I was a sad sight. Shannon drove me to the Supreme Court where I stood on crutches before the court to make my argent. One of my citations was to an opinion authored by Justice Albert C. Lockwood, father of then sitting Lorna Lockwood. I wanted to bring her father's learned decision to her attention, but didn't want to be too obvious in the process. So I focused my eyes at one end of the bench and then gradually looked down to see if I'd gotten the appropriate response. The poor dear was sound asleep.

[laughter]

Well, we prevailed by a unanimous court decision. In 1973, Governor Jack Williams appointed me to a vacant seat on the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for Yavapai County . Also the Chief Justice appointed me as presiding judge. At that time, there were only about 50 Superior Court judges, together with 9 Court of Appeals judges and 5 justices. A relatively small but collegial state judiciary. Over the years as a Superior Court judge, the most notorious criminal case I had was the state of Arizona v. Michael and Patrick Poland. The brothers were charged with the first degree murder of two armored car guards. It was a fascinating case. At approximately 8:00 a.m. on May 24, 1977, the armored car left from Phoenix with three hundred and ei...twenty-eight thousand dollars in cash on its routine delivery to banks in Northern Arizona . When it failed to make its deliveries, the authorities were notified and the van built to be impenetrable from the outside, was found open, abandoned and empty off I-17 on the Bblebee turnoff. No guards, no money. There was originally speculation that the guards had taken the money and disappeared. It appeared to have been the perfect crime. But there is also always an unanticipated event, isn't there? Three weeks later, the bodies of the guards rose to the surface of Lake Mead, near the Nevada side of the lake. They had been placed in canvas bags weighted with rocks. The probable cause of death was drowning. While this showed robbery and murder, there was no immediate clue as to who had committed the crimes. The FBI did a remarkable job of investigation, compiling a lot of circstantial evidence. Yet there was nothing to tie the crimes to the Poland brothers. Then there was the discovery of another fortuitous event. When the brothers had driven their pickup truck to the water's edge, placed the bodies in a rented boat, taken the bodies across the lake, they returned to find the pickup stuck in the mud. Isolated, they called for a wrecker to pull them out. A tow truck driver was then able to provide a limited description which tied the Polands to the lake, and thus to the crime. Earlier witnesses testified that they had seen what looked like a highway patrol car and two uniformed men stopped behind the armored car on I-17. A rental car was located and the agents found that a person had purchased a light bar used to make the car look like a police car. In renting the car, buying the light bar, the canvas bags and renting the boat, of course, the men always used fictitious names. There was a lot of other evidence, all circstantial, which led to a lengthy trial and the conviction of the brothers. It was my job to sentence them to death, which I did.

They appealed and the Arizona Supreme Court appropriately...appropriately reversed on basically two grounds. First, jury misconduct. The jurors had considered other evidence which was not presented at trial. The second reason was because after the trial and before the appeal the Supreme Court had changed the rules of evidence as they pertained to hypnotically enhanced testimony, testimony that had been obtained from the tow truck operator. The case had to be retried. Another jury reached the same verdicts, and the same sentences were imposed. …The defendants professed their innocence, as did some others, incidentally. Their guilt was supported beyond all doubt, when their wives under use immunity, provided evidence that they had served as accomplices to the crimes if under duress. They were able to fill in many of the minor details. The brothers were eventually executed. That reminds me of the difficulty in imposing a death sentence. It's tough. You are called upon to decide the life or death of an individual. It's an awesome task. Now, juries can impose the sentence based on their collective wisdom in the appropriate case. At that time, however, it just came with the territory and was the sole responsibility of the judge. I stbled through my first one in sentencing a man who had previously killed, and after his release from prison in Utah came to Arizona and murdered again. As evil as he was, I struggled and choked my way through it. And then bolted from the bench to go into chambers to recover my emotions. The defendant was un-phased by it all. He looked at his lawyer and said, “What the hell's the matter with him?”

[laughter]

Later, I was telling Frank Gordon, Justice Gordon, about this as a Superior Court judge in Mohave County . He said he had a similar experience. In his case, after struggling with the required litany, he said to the defendant, “If you'd please excuse me sir, but this is the first time I've ever had to do this.” The defendant replied, “I know what you mean judge, it's a first time for me too.”

[laughter]

There's an old saying that the difference between a state judge and a federal judge is that one is the friend of a Governor and the other a friend of a Senator. If that saying is true, I was blessed with both friendships. In 1984, Barry made it possible for me to be appointed as United States District Judge, where I have served since. I can't imagine having done anything with my life that could have been more challenging than being a judge. In addition, I've had the rare opportunity to work in all three branches of government -- executive, legislative, and judicial, and at the county, state and federal levels. It has given me a deep understanding and an appreciation of the government and the separation of powers concept, which is the cornerstone of our system. Early on, I well knew that every decision, upso...upset someone, often many people and at times the general public as well. It's just part of the job. In criminal cases, if a person knows the defendant or is related to him, a letter to the judge will say, “Judge, Tiger is not a bad boy. It won't do society any good to send him to prison. Put him on probation. Give him another chance.” If the person doesn't know the defendant, has only read or heard about him, the message is, “Judge you put that criminal in jail and throw away the key.”

[laughter]

While you never know what the outcry might be, I had one case when I did know the reaction with mathematical certainty. In the general election in 1988, Article 28, entitled English as the Official Language was added to the Arizona Constitution. Some of you, many of you, probably voted for it. It was extremely broad, applicable to all branches of government, all political subdivisions and all government officials and employees. They all were to act only in English. In addition, private citizens had a right to bring suit to enforce the Article. Marie Kelley Unigus, sued the state, the Governor Rose Mofford, the Attorney General Robert Corbin and others, seeking to have it declared unconstitutional and its enforcement enjoined. You see, Miss Unigas was employed by the State in its risk management office. And before the enactment, while performing her duties, often spoke Spanish with Spanish speaking only persons, who came into her office. The litigation was complicated and protracted. There were many hearings and motions. Some were granted, some were denied. On February 6, 1990, I ruled that the only proper parties were Unigas and Governor Mofford in her official capacity, and that the Article was facially unconstitutional in that violated the overbreadth doctrine of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In doing so, I knew for certain that 50.2% of the people were upset and 49 % …49.8% were very pleased. You see that was the vote count on the Amendment. Well, after a very tortured appellate process, complicated by the fact that the only remaining defendant, Rose Mofford, was pleased with the ruling and didn't appeal, and what was more important, Miss Unigas, the plaintiff had left state employment so the case was moot. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1997, threw it out for mootness. In 1998, in a separate state court action, I was vindicated by the Arizona Supreme Court when it ruled that the Article was unconstitutional for the same reasons.

While speaking of upsetting people, just recently I had a case which involved upgrades including making artificial snow from reclaimed water at the Arizona Snow Bowl on the San Francisco Peaks . I ruled in favor of the Forest Service and against several Indian tribes. The Sierra Club and others, obviously, many are unhappy and disturbed by the ruling. I can't discuss the case because it is on appeal, but I can share a letter that I got from an unhappy 8 year old girl. She said, “Judge if you were a chipmunk you wouldn't like it if you had to move to a different mountain!”

[laughter]

That's.... I...I see my time is up. Here we are on March 8, 2006, the legal and judicial history of our territory and state now encompasses 143 years. It has been my honor and privilege to have been a part of that history for all of those years, well all but a hundred.

[laughter]

[Applause]

You know, I asked him about the title of it this morning when he came in. He wouldn't tell me, so I… judge...

Do you have any questions?

No, but Judge Rosenblat asked me to……he as a bit of a hearing problem, and if you have any questions I'm -- of course you do, I'm here to repeat them……for him just in case so...

So any questions? Yes sir?

Question:
Isn't this... I'm basically supporting the English as official language. Couldn't it be modified to make it so that it's simple, so that we can pass that and besides that before it becomes a mute question with the…..._________was projections by 19... I don't know, I'm sorry…

[laughter]

…2020 or '25……the Anglos will be the minority in Arizona ?

Rosenblatt:
We've got a couple of questions here, most of which I can't answer obviously, but there are some……laws that provide for a specific language to be official language. It all depends on what's included in the particular…in the legislation and……that could take any nber of forms.

Question:
I have a question. …We've had several……judges and justices before you and one of the questions that sometimes I think about in talking about some controversial rulings, …what about the issue of security? H...Have you ever had to address that and……is it an issue you consider for judges and justices, your personal?

Rosenblatt:
Security?

Question:
Yes.

Rosenblatt:
That's a growing problem an...and it has many disadvantages. …It's difficult to get into courthouses now, and of course they're open to the general public. The whole policy is to let the people see what's going on in the courtroom. And yet by making it so difficult to address security matters, people simply don't come any longer. When I was in state court years ago, we had people that came there everyday just to see what was going on, it was a lot better than TV.

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
And my chambers were open to the public you could walk right into my……in my chambers and say, “Hi Judge” or “Hi PG” or whatever and that was all there was to it. Individual aspects……I have the……ignominious distinction of being……one……who was plotted……with……at the same time G...Governor Bruce Babbitt was, to kill us……by a group called the Arizona Patriots. And they were camped out up in…near Crown King and……they discussed this. Now they could not be prosecuted because it was -- there was no overt act taken to charge them with any kind of conspiracy. But, you've read about the problems. The danger of our society grows daily for all of us and……it's a problem that is going to seek and need……continual attention.

Question:
Judge, I want to thank you for your ruling on English as an official language. My husband and I run a non-profit and 53% of Arizona now is Hispanic and we service the under-privileged. I'm a disabled police officer who broke her back on the job and my husband's a retired judge, and we have to take care of everyone, because all of us our in this together. And I thank you for that courageous ruling.

Rosenblatt:
Well judges can't respond to praise or criticism…

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
…so you represent one portion of that……mathematical……determination.

Question:
I had a question…

Question:
Well, how can you justify keeping……death row prisoners in jail for 15 years?

Rosenblatt:
…I can't. And it's not my responsibility……

Question:
Can you…

Rosenblatt:
You have to understand that……the judge plays a limited role in those issues and……this is a combined matter and policy established by all three branches of our government.

Question:
What could be done to cure that

Rosenblatt:
Pardon?

Question:
What could be done to make that not happen?

…Nothing, other than address those cases that I am involved with and that I may have an issue to resolve. But it's not this person or the judiciary's responsibility to……carry out its orders. We are……unarmed, as it were, in anything other than stating our rulings and somebody else has to deal with carrying them out.

Presenter:
Question back there?

Question:
After all your experience in all of those places, what do you think are some of the strengths and the weaknesses of our system that you'd liked to see strengthened or……dealt with?

Presenter:
Did you get that? Strengths and weaknesses a...after all of your experiences, what are the strengths and weaknesses in our system?

Rosenblatt:
Well they're obvious to all of us, so this is an imperfect system by which we're governed. We don't know of any better system and it takes everyone's effort all the way from the electors to the officers to try and make it better. And...and it's just going to get more complicated as our society becomes more complex; as we become more populated, as we have new issues to address and of course………we're seeing that happen in……in Iraq and Afghanistan and the terrorist threat and people have honest……legitimate……differences of opinion on how to address those issues. But we have to keep struggling and never take…never take anything for granted in our system.

Presenter:
You have a question over here. …Philip.

Question:
Judge, this one I think you can't handle either, but if your answer with…with Jack's question about security, …maybe many of you noticed that new Justice Alito, with respect to the President's power, said that there would be situations where the President should be authorized to break federal law.

…does the tru..

Rosenblatt:
I didn't……catch the statement.

Rosenblatt:
…to put it another way I think Phil's asking an opinion on……how you feel about the domestic spying issue……that is now in place in the Bush Administration.

Question: Well, yeah, the specific comment that the President should be author -- should be allowed to violate federal law.

Should the Executive be allowed to violate federal law this way?

Roesnblatt:
Do you have ten foot pole there, sir?

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
It'd have to be longer than that and I still wouldn't answer that.

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
Remember the separation of powers. People forget it. We all pay lip service to it, but we really don't want to acknowledge the significance……that it has on us in our -- upon us on our daily lives.

Question?

Orme you said you were going to roast me, but I guess...

Orme? Phil?

Question:
No…I... I... I can't do that……PG, you might mention for our edification, how is the calendar……at this juncture…and…over the last five years? Is it freeing up…vis a vis, delays or pending on matters and issues?

Rosenblatt:
…Mine is a little bit better because I took senior status and so I have a little bit of……control over that, but institutionally wri...w...wide it's growing, and growing, and growing. And……it's part of this……problem that we're trying to address as we have an increased population……we have more disputes between individuals. We have more national security issues, everything in our lives become more complicated and, sadly, the place where those resolutions are now more commonly addressed is in the……judicial process. And……by coming to court. And Congress or other legislative bodies seem to be broad brush -- using a broader brush to address those issues so the simple answer to your question is, it's more and more crowed and……we need more and more judges. That means we need more and more staff and……and the cycle goes on.

Over here.

Question: Thank you.

Question over here.

Question:
How…how much of this problem might be attributed...attributed to the bar, relative to their aggressiveness in taking cases for personal gain?

...?

[laughter]

Question:
I know that there's a lot of attorneys in the room, but it's kind of a question for those of us who are concerned about the case load and frivolous……lawsuits.

Rosenblatt:
Well, hopefully the……the system weeds out those……illegitimate cases. …It does conse time. It does conse money. There's no question about that. And people have……a different opinion as to whether or not they are…ethically……acting or whether or not they are……are …violating the rules of ethics. I would point out that the State Bar of Arizona probably monitors and polices its profession to a greater extent than any other that this court is aware of in trying to make sure that members of the bar are ethic – acting……ethically.

W... Right back there, yes?

Question:
…Judge, you brought up some colorful memories that we have of Sam Steiger, and this group was privileged to hear the late Senator speak before us many times with……a lot of great – experienced laughs and……stories he shared with us. Would…Do you have a memory or two of the Senator, personal experiences that this…you find interesting?

Rosenblatt:
…I have bundle of experience.

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
…Somebody once said that the only reason I got appointed is because Barry dated one of my sisters when he was…...

[laughter]

Rosenblatt:
…a kid and coming to Prescott to visit……Uncle Morris. …And they did, …have a……a romantic relationship. So I have known him and……and his family really since……I was a little kid growing up in Prescott . And, …we were talking just before the show……that……in those early days……of the Labor Day Golf Tournament at the Prescott Hassayampa Club, hunt club, was the only and the big golf tournament in the State of Arizona. This is long before Pinetop and the Flagstaff courses, et cetera. …So he was always a regular participant in that……as well as……his brother, Bob. So……he just was a wonderful man……in my mind and………I remember him speaking to us as a kid, when -- long before he got into politics. When he was doing his Kachina collection process and traveling all over the state. And he would go to all the schools around the state and talk to them……about……their state and……show pictures about their state, and……he took that active interest which he maintained his entire life.

Rosenblatt:
Any other questions? We're right at 50 minutes like a regular class lecture and everyone's still alive and alert and I appreciate _______.

[Applause]

Class dismissed.